If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Poll: Should the GOP negotiate with Taliban?

Be advised that this is a public poll: other users can see the choice(s) you selected.

Unless you've been living under the rock for the past few years, you'll be well aware of the wave of terror Pakistan has been going through at the hands of so-called Pakistani Taliban.

The story goes something like this: Army starts an operation in Swat & Waziristan, there is an uproar about internally displaced people. The government holds off from taking further action which results in the settlement of Taliban in cities. Some thousands of deaths and damage later, the government decides to talk to them and then comes a drone attack that takes out their leader, Mehsud.

A few months and more carnage later the government has hopped onto the bandwagon of consensus building, peace talks and empty rhetoric again. As the attacks go on, threats by Taliban are aired live on news channels, and to add insult to the wounds, the second largest political party PTI led by Imran Khan stages sit-ins against drone attacks that take out enemies of the state.

We have always been accused of playing a double game but this time it seems as if we are playing a multidimensional game and doing everything in our power to destroy ourselves. It's one thing to ask for consensus on political matters but come on, does a state really need to acquire consensus amongst it's populace for existence? Shouldn't the state stand firm and resolute when dealing with terrorists?